User talk:Jni

Deletion of DJ Torb page

Why did you delete the DJ Torb article. He really wanted to have his own article

Arbitrary section break

you deleted a page that was true and cretible and verifiable. It was the other half of Mr. Pookie with notable history making achievements. Please restore the page and I will correct what you feel is irrelevant================ — Preceding unsigned comment added by CandaceCollinsConnect (talk • contribs)

What are you talking about? Is it Mr. Lucci? I did not delete that article, just the orphaned talk page without content, but the deleting admin had it right when he did it. The article does not seem to meet the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (music). I suggest you practise article creation at Wikipedia:Articles for Creation instead of asking for undeletion. But as you have requested undeletion at WP:UND, I'm letting the community and admins there to decide what to do. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 06:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sed, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plan 9 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of "Many of me"

Great, it was quick. Noteswork (talk) 15:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I am well known for my lightning-quick deletions. :-) jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 15:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

G13

To the best of my understanding we are generally at June 21 or 22 or possible even June213, not June 30. Unless people go in sequence, those trying to rescue articles cannot proceed rationally. You may not want to rescue any, but you should let other people do so more easily than having to use the much clumsier multistep process for looking at deleted articles. DGG ( talk ) 06:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't quite follow you. I'm deleting G13 cases almost always from CAT:CSD, and we certainly cannot leave these there tagged with db-tags for multiple days and try to sort their deletion to time order. The category would fill with huge backlog very soon. The HasteurBot should be teached to tag articles so they are more amenable to rescue, if AfC project participants want it to. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 08:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Onirban

As I checked the Wikidata item I noticed the sitelink to Onirban, where I reverted the inappropriate content back to the redirect to Anirban. Just now I however noticed that this redirect has been created by sockpuppet User:ASOFCAOWUC, so I'm asking you (as the expert from d:WD:RFD) whether the redirect page should be kept oder speedy deleted. Greetings, FDMS 21:42, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your interest in cleaning after this Anirban vandal. I decided to not speedy delete the Onirban redirect because En Wp policy is to allow plausible typo redirects and Onirban sounds to be onomatopoetically close enough to Anirban. For speedy deletion I'd need to use some other criteria than WP:R3, after coming to conclusion this not being enough misnomer-like, and while WP:G5 or WP:G6 are kinda close matches they are not exactly applicable here under the strictest interpretation of deletion rules. I think your revert was the best action for this, as the redirect is harmless. If want to delete the redirect I suggest listing it to WP:RFD for discussion. I don't anything about Wikidata project so can't say how our "plausible typo redirects" should be mapped to the data model there. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 07:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Understood, I didn't know that typo redirects are allowed here (in de.WP they are not, as far as I know). The Data item has fortunately already been deleted, probably also thanks to your comment. |FDMS 12:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

---

There is (again) something strange going on:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Onirban&action=history
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Onirban&action=history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mone_Rekho
FDMS 21:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. Blocked indef. as yet another Anirban Sen Gupta/Nirbaan Nei Jaar/Prince of Wikipedia/Surjendranil sockpuppet and deleted the vanity autobio (it has been deleted countless times before). jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 21:50, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Tekkensauce

I see what you mean! Deb (talk) 12:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Oppenomics

Dear Administrator,

About a week ago I was working on a new page "oppenomics" which went live before I could finish it. You quickly removed it and I contested the deletion on the grounds that it is a new philantropic academic effort aimed at helping many companies with economic oportunities - crowdfunding-like. After all Wikipedia has already Kickstarter and similar words...

Here is my problem... 1) I would like for you to reconsider the removal of "oppenomics". 2) In any case, I would very much appreciate if you could send me, or put in my sandbox, the text that was deleted.

Kind regards,

Gonzalo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcgxc00 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

For the record, I did not delete Oppenomics just its orphaned talk page, which contained no useful argumentation regarding the speedy deletion performed by other admin. Here is the deleted text in its entirety:

The iconic word Oppenomics was created in 2012 by the economist Gonzalo Cuatrecasas to describe the economical opportunities that exist in any market ecosystem. That being any global marketplace, a macroeconomic or microeconomic environment, a public or private company, a process where people and assets interact.

The main idea behind the name was to look for a term that not only would describe economic opportunities, but also opportunities that are altruistically open to be adapted.

In the creation of this word, there was the peruse putting in practice two principles which the author firmly believed to be critical to the enhancement of any economic interchange. The first slogan focuses on existing operational processes in the current state of relevance "For every inefficiency, there is an economic opportunity". The second, on the other hand, is based on the believe that in economics everything is been tried before, however since time is unique and space is relative to the time, we only have to look around to contrast economic opportunities which could be applied to current context.

Frankly, this reads mostly as nonsense and you are strongly discouraged to posting your own neologisms or original research or anything relating to yourself or your academic work to Wikipedia's article space. Content like this gets deleted, so don't waste time keeping it in your personal sandbox either. Besides, an opportunity is merely an occasion on which successful human action is possible. It is a situation that an individual can take advantage of to his gain. I believe von Mises put it this way. No need to invent a new terminology, your oppenomics is just an useless neologism. Or if this is some crowd-sourcing initiative, contrary to article text proper, then that is non-notable as well and will be very likely subject of our deletenomics if you re-create it. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 15:22, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Dear JNI, first of all, I thank you for recovering the text I requested, and sorry for bothering with my miss attempt to start a page. On to your comments, whilst Oppenomics it may read as nonsense and useless to you, your words are unnecessarily harsh. I guess that not everyone has your capacity of appreciation for new thinking. It is true that Oppenomics is mostly original research, but founded in crowd-sourcing fundamentals for the good of companies that need ideas to be more competitive. BTW. Your description of Opportunity is accurate and that is exactly what we want to provide, in this case, in the form of economic ideas. Also. Thanks for mentioning Von Mises because he was known for challenging classic (economic) theory, primarily because it is impossible to determine the equilibrium of all factors... as it is in the human brain

Kind regards User:pcgxc00 —Preceding undated comment added 08:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

AdminStats

Hello, Jni. You have new messages at User_talk:JamesR/AdminStats#Count.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— JamesR ^(talk) 09:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

I am fresh out of wiki kittens; please accept this cake as a thank you for your support and thoughtful comments during my (now withdrawn) RfA. What doesn't kill me... Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Hope your next iteration through the RFA-process goes much more smoothly than this time. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 12:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Deleted article about Michael De Jong

Dear Jni

After weeks of waiting I was glad so see something's changed on my Sandbox-page. Unfortunately I wasn't that glad anymore to see my whole article was deleted. I made a promise to Michael De Jong himself that he would get his own wiki-page.

First of all I don't get the whole "copyright infringement" issue. I checked the page you are referring to and indeed there were some similar phrases in my article, but the fact is I got my information from a different page which I did refer to: a biography of Michael De Jong on his own website. This biography seems to be the same as the one on the page you referred to. If the problem is that I just "copied" phrases, I could change my text. If the reference I used isn't good enough, I could change the reference.

Anyhow I'm looking forward to your explanation and solution and, please, can I get my article back in my sandbox. It took me quite some time to write it, the fact that English isn't my native language doesn't make it easier for me to write English articles. Thanks in advance. --Heartaches (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, first I'd advice never to give promises to someone to get their own wiki-page here! This is an encyclopedia, not a place where arbitrary biographies can be posted. On quick look it seems to me that Mr. De Jong might not be notable enough for article here. More serious issue is the copyright violation: You did not just add few similar phrases to the article, but copied large chunks of text from [1], a website which says "©2011 - MunichRecords B.V. || All rights reserved". As I was unable to find any indication that this material has been licensed with a license compatible with Wikipedia's policies, I'm not going to restore this article. You can ask for independent review of this at WP:DRV, but first get some familiarity of our copyright violation policies and ask Mr De Jong to license his biographical information on his website with terms agreeable to Wikipedia. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 07:49, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Dear Jni. What a strange argument to say that in your opinion Mr. De Jong "might not" be notable enough for an article on wikipedia. I bet I can name up lots of people which in my opinion "might not" be notable enough and still have an article on wikipedia. That's just having different opinions. And, yes, maybe the reason I wrote the article doesn't stroke with the fact this is an encyclopedia. But if there's a page about Jimmy Reed, then why not one about Michael De Jong, they played music together. Anyhow, we should skip this discussion.

I find it a bit harsh to read that you just won't restore my article. As I said before, I could change my text to avoid the copyright issue. But therefore it would be nice to get my article back in my sandbox. And I really hope I don't need to discuss this further at WP:DRV. Thanks in advance again. --Heartaches (talk) 22:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Your argument about notability is just WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, which has never been convincing at all in deletion discussions. But the main reason for keeping this deleted is that it contain large blobs of text that are copied verbatim from a website that has no open licensing at all for its content. Creating autobiographies is strongly discouraged, and autobiographies by proxy editor are not much better. If he is famous, someone else will write an article about him. We do not allow copies from websites unless it is clear the material is used with permission. Please have Mr De Jong license the text in his website so it is compatible with Wikipedia's policies and make sure correct permission is displayed in his website. Or don't reuse the text there if cannot do that. It is much better to write it in your own words and then cite the website as reference. Taking this to DRV won't very likely help you, instead please get familiar with our policies, starting from WP:CV that is currently linked to from your own talk page. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 07:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

this spammer

Hello, do you have an idea what to do with [2] and d:Q15731522? Wikidata item counts as legitimate as long the bengali page exists. I don't know if or how to start a deletion request at bnwiki. Holger1959 (talk) 07:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately I don't know a thing about bnwiki. I think we could ask for help from some of the global sysops or stewards with this persistent cross-wiki sockpuppeteer. The Anirban Sen Gupta / Nirbaan Nei Jaar / Article Editor of Wikimedia Foundation idiot is active in half a dozen wikis already and there is no reason to believe he will limit his activities to just enwiki, enwikiquote, bnwiki, commons, wikidata, wikivoyage where he has been observed in past. Also, cleaning up his images and media files from Commons is tedious unless we get some local admin there to help. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 08:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

[EC] I've tried to request deletion using {{delete}} ... |FDMS 08:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

a minute ago i found another page for deletion: Talk:Anindranil Sengupta. Holger1959 (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done deleted. Thanks, jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 19:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, some minutes ago i found 182.66.61.0 edits on Wikidata and Commons, related to a new suspicious user [3] similar to the ones above. I think you can take care best. Holger1959 (talk) 21:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

This one is more tricky. Both User:R_J_Ashash and User:Rahul_Jekar_Aheshash seem to be same user. I'm nominating the user page to WP:MFD as WP:FAKEARTICLE. These IP's have deleted edits relating to this user: Special:DeletedContributions/182.66.51.10, Special:DeletedContributions/182.66.60.63, Special:DeletedContributions/182.66.59.43 and these are in same address range than what the Anirban Sen Gupta vandal uses. (He has too good IP mobility in Class B address range and thus can avoid blocks.) This time the signature edits of Anirban are absent, but user page history including deleted revisions, contains similar gimmics like claiming to be a Wikipedia administrator, and fake comments of other users and fake peer review. I suggest reporting this to SPI, as CheckUser might be needed for additional evidence before blocking. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 07:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Have you spotted this user [4] already? same fake contents on userpage and talk page eg. [5], [6], [7] (honeypot). And there is a related account [8]. Hope you can take care again. Holger1959 (talk) 00:02, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Done blocked & deleted both. Thanks for spotting this idiot again! jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 16:12, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:JUSTIN DREW BIEBER

Uhm, JUSTIN DREW BIEBER exists. WilyD 09:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Uhh, maybe I should have used G6 here but who cares about the exact reason as there was no useful content in talk page. I would have deleted the stupid upper-case redirect also, had it been created by some newbie. Is there a reason to keep it? jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 10:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

DRV it is then. WilyD 10:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Why do you insist making a point? What content exactly should be salvaged? Why is cleaning this kind of useless stuff not a valid G6 deletion in your opinion? I'm deleting the redirect as R3 recently created implausible typo, if that is what you want. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 11:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

That you only wouldn't delete the redirect because it was created by someone knowledge enough to recognise that it's an abuse of admin tools is unacceptable bullying from an admin. "Admins should no be bullies" is a point worth making. WilyD 12:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

So you want me to start a wheel war agaisnt you, then? Is that the correct interpretation of your critizing me for NOT countering your action of creating R3-deletable redirect, out of deference to fellow admin? Your twisted logic is so confused I have hard time understanding, what is the issue here. Could you please detail, what worthwhile content I have deleted when I allegedly "abused" my admin tools? jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 12:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

R3 is not applicable to choice of capitalisations, searching in all caps happens all the time, and not just because you accidentally click the capslock key (although that's probably the most common cause. I certainly search in all caps for that reason from time to time). There's absolutely no plausible case for an R3 deletion. The talk page is just an archive for anybody trying to figure out what happened (the marginal value of it is low, but the value of deleting it is zero). What I want is for you not to abuse your admin tools by making deletions out of process to enforce your preferred versions of pages, and to harass users (i.e., me), with whom you have disagreements. I haven't used any admin tools (well, I looked at the deleted content), and took it to DRV specifically because I'm not looking to wheel war. I'm just trying to write an encyclopaedia, and fix the actions other editors take that're hostile to that goal (in this case, you deleting useful archives and redirects out of process). If you can be discouraged from abusing your tools in the future, that'd be a big plus, but I'm sceptical that's very likely. WilyD 12:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Then go write the encyclopedia instead of rule-lawyering about the policies to me. Calling a single IP-editor comment as archive of what happened is beyond silly. The "deletion contestation" statements of seldomly even read by deleting admins and are routinely deleted with the talk page, they are not something that are saved for posterity. Also, WP:DRV is not for arguing technicalities. How I have harassed you? I have had nothing to do with you before you started making groundless complaints about my "admin tools abuse". You are the one who is harassing me with these phony accusations and making WP:POINT with obviously time-wasting WP:DRV processes for saving a single anonymous comment on some talk page with bad title that nobody will ever even find, much less read, as there is no real content to salvage in first place! jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 12:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Your policy interpretation regarding WP:R3 is also erroneous. It does not say in the criteria itself that it cannot be applied to UPPER CASE redirects, that application is simply not listed in the "don't apply to" sentences of policy. Maybe someone has invented this interpretation in some talk page, (like it is established consensus to keep the CamelCase very old redirects) but it is not in the criteria itself so you cannot really call deletions that don't honor it as out-of-process deletions, much less admin abuse. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 13:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry for randomly interjecting in an almost-stale discussion between two editors here... but searching in all caps means nothing. Wikipedia search ignores case. :P - Purplewowies (talk) 03:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

And since you ask, persistent abuse of admin tools is something worth looking into further, yes. I have things I'd rather be doing, but not things that are more important. WilyD 12:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I have never abused the admin tools. Last time some clueless admins complained about "admin abuse" when I deleted obvious garbage like UnKnoWn??. Needless to say, that complaint did not go very far. You are free to start perusing my 25000+ deletions and look for "admin abuse" there, and make more DRV-cases around technicalities, if you don't have anything more worthwhile to do. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 12:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Given that you made a bad deletion, and then doubled down on it by making another bad deletion (which is unambiguously abuse), and I'd recalled seeing your name recently in a discussion about out of process deletions, I expected to find rather a lot more instances. At the moment, I don't think it's worth trying to raise it beyond a DRV, but if you continue to abuse your tools and be unapologetic about it, it'll have to be sooner or later. WilyD 14:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Go ahead, go find the large number of instances. But re-read the actual deletion policies first as I have zero interest in explaining to other admins how WP:R3 actually works or why the order of deletion of talk page and its associated article is mostly irrelevant, or why I did not delete something at some random point of time, or why I did delete something during some particular sequence of edits and deletions, or why I deleted clear-cut crap like Angerism (one of my supposedly bad deletions, you can start your review of my deletions from that one). jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 14:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Article re-submission

Hi Jni,

Attempting to re-submit a SAFELipo page that reviewed by you earlier in January. Edits have been made to the problems identified in your original review (G12). Just wanted to give you a heads up, as there is a notification on the article wizard to do so.

Etna-research (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Good luck with the article! jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 19:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

SWEISS welding

Dear JNI, i'm a little bit confused why you deleted our page, if there is many US competitors having ti's page realted to brand like us, is that because we are not US company? or there is a more substancial reason,hope to lisen from you soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SWEISS welding (talk • contribs) 13:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_Electric

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Electric

Hope u can explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SWEISS welding (talk • contribs) 13:06, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not about writing yourself or your company. Someone else will create the article in question, if the company is notable. But you did not even start creating an article, just posted something to your talk page, which is a place for talking to you. Your username also violates our user name policy. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 13:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I said DO NOT DELETE (The Cutting Room Floor (wiki))

Can you read? Jesus. I wanted to merge it with my sandbox page. :/ Tomlamusga (talk) 14:45, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Content-free cruft is not appropriate to the main encyclopedia. Keep it is in AfC space for now. If you create duplicate copies, extra ones will be just deleted. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 14:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Today's MfD closes

What an amazing connection of YATOEs (Yet Another Theory Of Everything)! How did you find them all? JohnCD (talk) 23:04, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

There is much more of that kind lurking in user namespace. See User:Jni/User space review for some candidates and also some searches I used to find this stuff, for example, [9]. I haven't had time to nominate everything there is to MfD, feel free to investigate the MfD candidates on this list if want to help. To my knowledge, nobody has systematically searched for WP:FRINGE content from userpages before, so there is a long-term accumulation. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 07:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

And now I have nominated more WP:NOTTOE (Wikipedia is not a place to post your personal Theory of Everything) candidated :-) jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 21:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Deleting St. Nicoluas, Distillery

Hi, I was wondering how I can have my page deleted, under copyrights violation, if I am shareholder, and international sales manager/marketing? Tell me that please? You have no rights to do take such action, if it will happens again, I will send you invoice for my contractors who edit this page! I hope for future co-operation with wikipedia, this forbidden incident would not happened ever again!

Sincerely, LT — Preceding unsigned comment added by STNtrade (talk • contribs) 17:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Your spammy page was deleted because it contains material directly copied from a website that says "Copyright 2009 | All rights reserved | Terms of use". It will be deleted again, and you be blocked from editing, if you continue introducing copyright violations to Wikipedia. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 17:43, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Feedback from MfD deletion of fringe physics articles

Hello Jini!

I surprise why you have deleted my user and talk page Bapi Patho? . Are you a scientist/or an eminent Theoretical physicist
of any university 
or have you any university degrees in physics/ mathematics or  any publications on Astronomy or in Theoretical physics 

in very high impact indexed journals

like me to mark all these Published  articles in very high impact indexed Journals put in my user page 
as "Spam" or as "Psudo sciences" or fringe physics ? I dont know what is your education level( at basic  Graduate honors level in physics

/Mathematics or Master degree or doctoral level degree or Post Doc level at particle physics/ theoretical physics/ or mathematics from

any recognized university?) however I could not be aware of the matter neither from your user
ID information,given there ? Will you please furnish that in your User ID ?
My Biodata and CV is linked at
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iyRkGh4GC7PWhiUOKdbcFhCZzHaln_KJ0isi52nQYm0/edit?pli=1
My Short CV/Resume  is given in the link] and also at my user ID.
Please go through my CV and  my publications on Theoretical physics,
Astronomy & cosmological Sciences linked few of them  there and
my memberships in various forums on astronomy or please search 
in any Search  engine  with key words" Professor Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya" 
either at Google.com or at yahoo.com.

The links to my Short CV/resume given https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iyRkGh4GC7PWhiUOKdbcFhCZzHaln_KJ0isi52nQYm0/edit?pli=1

please go through my all Blogs articles 

http://totallydrug-resistanttbemergesinindia.blogspot.in/ Blogs there are on Theoretical Physics;Astronomy; Medical Sciences,Pathology; Evolution etc.

However all contents,words, Syllables &Scientifically meaningful sentences of all blogs posted articles
are Strictly Copy Righted material to Prof. Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya under
IPR Copy Right Act section-/301/ 3D/107/1012/ RDF and Protect Intellectual Property Right ACT of USA-2012.
 Please Do not try/attempt to infringe to avoid huge civil/criminal proceedings in IPR Courts:
{Please Remember the warning] Till date 13500 scientists all over the world downloaded/ read those articles
published in these blog.No one had commented to call them as Pseudo sciences or spam  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bapi Patho (talk • contribs) 10:53, 12 March 2014 (UTC) 

Rest assured I have no intention to read or copy your words, Syllables &Scientificallymeaning (sic) ful (sic) sentences of all blogsposted (sic) that are Strictly Copy Righted (sic) material to Prof Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya under IPR Copy Right Ac (sic) materials. Wikipedia does not want to hear about your research either, so don't bother us again with your garbage. jni ^(delete)_{…just not interested} 11:27, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Radhika Nagpal page 3/8/14

It appears that you believe there was infringing content on the page I developed for Radhika Nagpal. However, I have no idea what material you believe infringes.

Margoseltzer (talk) 13:42, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Replied to your talk page. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 19:20, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Appreciate your replying. I will remove the abstracts -- it seemed that MANY academic's pages with "notable publications" included the abstracts, which are frequently used verbatim to describe work, respecting the "fair use" clause for the use of copyrighted materials.

However, in terms of your comment about "unproven notability," I will avoid getting into any contest about what constitutes significant citations, and simply point out criteria 5:

5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or "Distinguished Professor" appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon).

Criterion 5 can be applied reliably only for persons who are tenured at the full professor level, and not for junior faculty members with endowed appointments.

Major institutions, for these purposes, are those that have a reputation for excellence or selectivity. Named chairs at other institutions are not necessarily sufficient to establish notability.

Dr. Nagpal holds the Kavli Chair (a named chair) and Harvard University ( an institution with a reputation for excellence). This is all fully documented in the page.

Margoseltzer (talk) 14:14, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I have to ask

On your user page the grouping on the right I get but what about the grouping on the left. I actually thought protein sequence but that wont work either (I even entered it into sequence data base the Os be dammed).Peter Rehse (talk) 20:53, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Hint: it is a wiki-sculpture, based on a certain real sculpture. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 21:04, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Addiction Psychologist

About 1 yr ago this page was deleted. Fine. I'm gonna start from scratch, but i would like to revisit my old article for learning purposes, but i don't know how to access it. I've tried requesting it for retrieval with no luck. Please help. AddictionPsychologistFrank (talk) 20:34, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Article on Ilia Delio

I have to wonder why you deleted this, citing "copyright infringement" - when the same person who wrote the content on the website (www.iliadelio.com) that was supposedly infringed wrote the entry for Wikipedia (Ilia Delio herself)! You can't infringe on your own copyright!!!

Please restore this page, approve it and make it available!!!

173.28.57.131 (talk) 13:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Peter

More reasons to keep

Hello Jni, long time ago you have expressed your views on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_dictators. Now I have improved the related articles and lists with systematic findings based on published reliable sources from history and political science. However, two of them are currently submitted to Afds (by a Chinese Wikipedian who in the past has personally attacked me for my contribution to politics-related articles in Chinese Wikipedia). Your comments are welcome and appreciated: (1) Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_dictatorships (2)Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_modern_dictators_in_Latin_America. Thanks.--_{(comparingChinese Wikipedia vs Baidu Baike by hanteng)} 15:28, 5 April 2014 (UTC)